If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Daily driven 10 second C63 AMG trapping at 130+ in the 1/4 mile? No problem. This C63 AMG is from Long Beach California and was driven up to the Famoso Drag strip. The owner just changed the rear tires and wheels to a drag setup and the result was 10.794 @ 130.23 miles per hour with a very nice 1.612 60 foot. He clearly is hooking up very well and has just about maximized what he can hit with his Stage II 2.3 liter twin screw.

As a reminder, the Weistec Stage II supercharger consists of the components listed below and is good for an increase of over 144 wheel horsepower over stock. This car also has long tube headers.

I have a TON of respect for the OEM stock C63.
But, I would simply buy a CTS-V with a OEM supercharger and bolt ons, and be faster, before I would do an aftermarket supercharger on a C63, and be slower.

Then buy one.

Why would you be faster with a CTS-V with bolt ons? You are going to push the stock blower which is a roots out of its efficiency range and generate too much heat just trying to keep up. Not to mention this is the 2.3 liter blower and not the 3.0 twin screw. On top of that, the M156 has the same displacement yet a higher redline and superior heads/valvetrain. The C63 is also lighter.

I also have no idea why you brought this up as its irrelevant.

Also, did you even notice that slip you posted is the same trap in negative DA? All that 20 years of experience coming into play? So... how is this car slower again exactly?

Originally Posted by TT C6

I am hoping the next W205 C63 can duplicate these times with just a tune, and maybe bolt ons.
If so, and it gets a DCT and AWD, I am in for one.

I thought you said you would only get one if it had the M157 and the 4.0 would be too disappointing?

Sorry but that has to be one of the dumbest posts I have read recently. I have seen NA Bolt-on C63's overtake CTS-V's many times here in Qatar.

A supercharged C63 would humiliate any CTS-V with bolt ons on the street. I ran a couple of bolt on CTS-V's runnning on methanol with my supercharged SL63 and overtook them easily. @Sirex63 , also ran with a couple bolt on CTS-V's in the UAE with his supercharged C63 and did the same thing
Slower you say? lol, really shows that you know nothing about both cars.

Your post is exactly what I would have expected from Qatar.
Enjoy spending our money while it lasts.

Why would you be faster with a CTS-V with bolt ons? You are going to push the stock blower which is a roots out of its efficiency range and generate too much heat just trying to keep up. Not to mention this is the 2.3 liter blower and not the 3.0 twin screw. On top of that, the M156 has the same displacement yet a higher redline and superior heads/valvetrain. The C63 is also lighter.

I also have no idea why you brought this up as its irrelevant.

Also, did you even notice that slip you posted is the same trap in negative DA? All that 20 years of experience coming into play? So... how is this car slower again exactly?

I thought you said you would only get one if it had the M157 and the 4.0 would be too disappointing?

Considering Atco is my home track, I'm obviously aware of the good air. Thanks.
I posted that link because I'm familiar with that car.
I'm not going to scour the internet for similar cars in similar DA.
But, thanks for another one of your responses to my posts that are par for the course.

I respect the hell out of the stock C63.
130mph is fast for a steet car, and more than respectable.

But, we all know the cost, complexity, and risk of adding FI to a NA car.
Add to that the complexity of the AMG engine, and the cost of the C63.
All of those factors considered, I would go with the CTS-V if I wanted FI.
Although, the Caddy is a fat pig. That's what I asked what this C63 weighed after the addition of the blower.

I respect the hell out of the stock C63.
130mph is fast for a steet car, and more than respectable.

But, we all know the cost, complexity, and risk of adding FI to a NA car.
Add to that the complexity of the AMG engine, and the cost of the C63.
All of those factors considered, I would go with the CTS-V if I wanted FI.
Although, the Caddy is a fat pig. That's what I asked what this C63 weighed after the addition of the blower.

So I still don't understand your comment regarding the Caddy being faster when it isn't. How does what you stated make any sense?

What about the risk of modifying any car? What is the risk of mild boost on a high VE motor? You can make more power with less heat/boost. Isn't that ultimately safer? Isn't that safer on pump gas? I think you're reaching now.

So I still don't understand your comment regarding the Caddy being faster when it isn't. How does what you stated make any sense?

What about the risk of modifying any car? What is the risk of mild boost on a high VE motor? You can make more power with less heat/boost. Isn't that ultimately safer? Isn't that safer on pump gas? I think you're reaching now.

If you're looking for an argument, I'n not giving it to you today.

Although, your reputation downvotes do make me feel ..... I have to go grab a tissue.

I never said that car couldn't elapse that time without race gas! Only stating what it had, as it WAS on race gas.

In addition, your car was running A different setup than the setup on the car above. You had race ported heads, and higher boost on your 2.3L. In addition, I recall you had a RACE tune. I remember you were making 664 whp and Jim was making 660. I also recall you ran a 10.8-10.9. So you can't compare your car with the one above as your car was more powerful during that period, and still is :-)

you ran a 10.86 on a +5000 DA In Vegas. Your car was making 664whp. So again, don't compare your car with the one above as you were making much more whp. In addition, your boost during that period was around 14psi which is higher than the C63 above which is around 8psi

where did you run 10.7 on your 2.3L on pump gas? Even if you did, you car was more powerful than the C63 above.

you ran a 10.86 on a +5000 DA In Vegas. Your car was making 664whp. So again, don't compare your car with the one above as you were making much more whp. In addition, your boost during that period was around 14psi which is higher than the C63 above which is around 8psi

where did you run 10.7 on your 2.3L on pump gas? Even if you did, you car was more powerful than the C63 above.

Mr. Right? Don't be so ignorant.

1. Show me where I was running higher boost?
2. I will find the vid showing the 10.7...I didn't get the slip.
3. Why do you think I had a race tune in?
4. As you can buy 100 Octane fuel at the pump in Vegas I fail how to see that is race fuel.